Jump to content

Remove these ads by becoming a Premium Member

All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Today
  2. Tips for Having a Great Plate Meeting

    Warren ( @Umpire in Chief), a few quick bits of feedback from watching this video: Don't apologize for an expectation. The hat shall be worn, bill parallel to the ground and forward. No "ifs ands or buts". If one is wearing their hat backwards, they are a clown. Consider obtaining a baseball-themed poster or print to hang behind you. Consider locating an LED-based lamp, dimmable, and placing it behind you, and low (off-screen). Aim it up the wall so as to "backlight" the wall. As it is, the light source is currently "confrontational", and it makes for some harsh shadows and unsettling contrast. Instead of sitting dead-smack center, consider sitting off to one side, and turned at a very slight angle. Again, you currently are positioned in a "confrontational" manner, where you could be more "conversational" by changing your position and seating angle. As you have it currently, determine what are the boundaries of your viewing plane (width). Mark those with tape on your desk. Then, mark dead center. Then, divide the overall viewing plane width into thirds (1/3rds). Shift your seat over (left or right, whichever you feel is your "better side") and then angle your body slightly away from the camera, towards the center line. Your insight / encouragement to seek or request more baseballs? Brilliant, I like it. You're right, the plate meeting is not a forum for a rules clinic. If we keep it to a simple acknowledgement of the Rules set we're using for that game, "OBR, NCAA, Fed, Tournament Mod'ed, etc." then that eliminates a lot of superfluous talking. Strike zones should not be discussed at a plate meeting. And, lastly, just as much as a Rules clinic is unnecessary at a plate meeting, so too is a tutorial on how to approach an umpire completely unnecessary, as well as being contemptuous and condescending. Our giving them this directive isn't going to change the habits of those jackwagons who storm out of the dugouts and verbally abuse us. Besides that, it doesn't paint ourselves in a particularly good shade of confidence in our abilities and judgement. What coaches are hearing when we burble on about "calling time and approaching the umpire who made the call" is, "Hey, at some point in this game, there's going to be a blown call and I'm hoping you don't chew my ass off about it because other coaches have done it (to me, possibly) before".
  3. End of game situation

    @Richvee gave you the current 2018 caseplay. It was confusing and conflicting in past years. Maybe @lawump got them to get their sht together. Anyway it is a time play in all codes. So @maven‘s rules interpreter should be given some latitude or maybe he was right and maven was out of date. @maven ?
  4. End of game situation

    I don't know how to square the idea that the awarded runners score with 9.1.1's general rule of no runs score after the 3rd out is made. The passing of the runner is an immediate out, so how can any other runners score? Where is this exception for awarded bases? By definition, an award is simply the right to advance without risk of being put out - there is nothing saying that the award shall proceed no matter what.Why wouldn't it just be a normal timing play? Other cases hint at normal timing rules applying but none really address this directly. Where do we see anything, in any rule or case, that says that awarded bases have an exception from normal timing rules? Absent specific, controlling guidance saying the awarded bases score and are an exception to normal timing rules, I think the idea that they score is illogical and against the entire construct of other rules. I believe the BRD is simply wrong. I do agree that the force is removed - but so what? We're not relying on that or the 9.1.1 exceptions here - just the regular rule of runs must score before the 3rd out is made. It's an argument using an irrelevant rationale.
  5. End of game situation

    From the 2016 BRD (section 461, p. 307): Play 286-461: Bases loaded, 2 outs. B1 homers and passes R1 in the base path. At the time he passes the runner, only R3 has crossed the plate. The ball is dead on the home run. The umpire calls out BR immediately. Ruling: In FED, all runners score. In NCAA/OBR, only R3 scores. FED note 437: The rationale: The ball is dead and all runners are awarded four bases. BR passes the runner AFTER touching first, so his third out is not a force out: Count all the runs…
  6. End of game situation

    Unless NFHS rules and interpretations changed in 2017 or 2018, the play in the OP is not a time play. Since the batter hit an out-of-the-park home run, under FED rules the batter and runner(s) are awarded four bases. The batter-runner is out the moment he passes the runner but the runner is still allowed to score due to the dead-ball award (even if the BR is the third out). I do not have the 2017 or 2018 rule books or case books. However, I did check the yearly interpretations and rule changes found currently on page seven of the High School forum on this site and did not see any pertinent changes needed to answer this question. By the way, this scenario is a time play in both NCAA and OBR.
  7. Two Batter Interference ?'s

    Just make sure to mute it...Or add you're voice-over to it!
  8. Two Batter Interference ?'s

    Great video for a future Good Call Blue Video
  9. End of game situation

    We need 2.21.1 SIT B to give the ruling with 2 outs. *2.21.1 SITUATION B: R3 is on third and R2 on second. B4 hits down the leftfield line. R3 scores, but R2 maliciously runs over F5 after R3 touches home plate. RULING: Interference because of malicious contact. The ball is dead immediately. R3's run counts because he scored before the interference. R2 is called out and ejected because of malicious contact. The batter-runner shall be returned to the base he last legally touched before interference occurred.
  10. Why in the world is Manfred pressing this issue so hard. He's jeopardizing years of player/owner "peace" over a stupid freaking rule that might shave 2-3 minutes off an average game......maybe......Does he think someone who doesn't like baseball is going to to suddenly say, "Hey, baseball has a pitch clock now, I'm going to watch baseball now" This does nothing for the good of the game, player/owner relations, or getting the A.D.D. millennials interested in the game. This guy's trouble.
  11. End of game situation

    Yes, but in defense of Mavin's interpreter, CP 9.1.1M did exist at least in 2015 and allowed runs to score on the award when an out was made in passing or malicious contact. 8.4.2L also was in that book and was in conflict with 9.1.1M. Guess which one dissappeared this year. But what do we do with a malicious contact out?
  12. End of game situation

    Agree. FED cites 8-4-2 m. passes an unobstructed preceding runner before such runner is out (including awarded bases) *8.4.2 SITUATION L: With two outs, R2 on second base and R1 on first base, B5 singles. B5 passes R1 between first and second base (a) just before R2 touches the plate or (b) just after R2 touches the plate. RULING: In (a), the run does not count, while in (b), it does count. A runner is called out at the moment he passes a preceding runner, but the ball remains live.
  13. End of game situation

    Time play. In this case with only R1, no run scores, extra innings.
  14. Batter interference?? Who is out??

    Exactly the problem I have with this interp. If the runner starts running AFTER the fact, kill it when the runner takes off and return him. Yhat seems to be much more justifiable to me. I actually don't see this much different than a runner stealing, ball fouled off, and then F4 gets in the way of the running R1, and calling OBS and awarding R1 2B.
  15. Cleaning New Balance Plate Shoe

    Your rain stops in April? Lucky bastard! Our rain continues through the end of May here in Portland.
  16. Yesterday
  17. End of game situation

    This arrived in the ol' email bag this morning. The question pertains to HS ball, but feel free to post the answer for other codes, if they're different. At least one state interpreter has given the wrong answer to this question.
  18. Batter interference?? Who is out??

    Yes, and the hindrance is determined by how the runner reacts to a situation. The batter caused F2 to miss the ball and caused the ball to roll 15, 20, 30 feet away from F2. If the runner stays put, there is nothing. If the runner breaks, the batter is out. So, the batter INT is indeed determined by the actions of the runner, after the fact. I significant difference from runner stealing THEN BI.
  19. Intentionally Uncaught Ball vs Intentionally Dropped Ball View the full article
  20. Two Batter Interference ?'s

    and the Emmy goes to F2
  21. Batter interference?? Who is out??

    Unfortunately for this alert, hustling runner his teammate committed interference.
  22. Regardless of the time they might shave off of the game, if they save 3 minutes, they'll find a way to cram 3 more TV commercials in.
  23. Carlucci Hall of Fame Model

    Wow, that is cool! Can't be too many of these things around Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk
  24. Batter interference?? Who is out??

    The batter INT is determined by whether the batter hinders play at the plate. With no runner to play on (for whatever reason), there cannot be INT. No hindrance = no INT.
  25. Two Batter Interference ?'s

    I don't see a pertinent difference between codes. This is runner INT with a protected fielder, correctly called and enforced. There should be no difference for FED. But you asked how it would be called under FED. The primary difference in a FED game is the likelihood that an umpire will screw up the call or enforcement.
  26. Two Batter Interference ?'s

    Actually, the BR can be doing exactly what he is supposed to be doing, i.e. running the bases as opposed to watching the ball, but if he interferes with the protected fielder he will be out. In this case if he would have simply run the bases he would have avoided interference.
  27. West Vest Revamp

    Rustoleum has a brand of automotive "paints" for interior and plastic. I have seen the results used on an old vinyl bucket seat and it wasn't bad at all. Particularly the fabric portion turned out very well. As to how long it lasts, I do not know. Painting plastic, like many things automotive requires many light coats and a consistent motion ...........but these paints come out of a rattle can, so inherently there are shortcomings.... good luck!.....post pics when done!
  1. Load more activity
×